IN THE COURT OF SHRI A.K.
SARPAL, ADJ,
TIS HAZARI, DELHI
ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO.592 OF 1996
IN THE MATTER OF:
M/s. Bahubali Services Ltd. … Plaintiff
VERSUS
Smt. Virendra Kumari & Anr. … Defendants
AFFIDAVIT BY WAY OF EVIDENCE ON BEHALF
OF THE DEFENDANT NO.1.
I, Virendra Kumari, W/o Brigadier V.P. Singh (Retd.), aged about
___ years, R/o 1003, Royale Retreat, Charmwood Village, Suraj
Kund Road, Faridabad-121009 (at present at New Delhi), do hereby
solemnly affirm and state as under:
1. That I am the Defendant No.1 in the above noted suit and am
fully conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and
hence competent to dispose before this Hon’ble Court.
2. I say that the present Suit for recovery of alleged loan
amount by the Plaintiff is not maintainable because the alleged
loan amount was never advanced to the Deponent but on the
contray was advanced to the Defendant no. 2. .
3. I say that in the year 1988, the Deponent was approached
by a friend viz. Shri Ahsok Shetty, the Defendant No.2 herein,
residing at ‘Cedar Wings’, 394, Second Cross, 3 rd Block,
Karnagala, Bangalore-34, and partner of a finance company viz.
M/s. Akita Financial Consultancy, based at 48, Lavelle Road,
Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as “M/s AFC”) who requested
the Deponent to represent his Company in Delhi as a Liaison
Representative Officer.
4. I say that a letter was issued retaining the Deponent as
liaison officer for Defendant No2 financial company i.e. M/s. Akita
Financial Consultancy, The letter stated that the job was to
identify potential clients within the Deponent’s social circle for
canvassing loan/deposit for the financial company and to put the
prospective clients in touch with Mr. Shetty directly, from time to
time. The copy of the letter dated 16.3.1988 is marked herewith
as EXHIBIT -DW1/1.
5. I say that as liaison Officer my job was to carry on liaison
work in respect of loan mobilisation, consultancy and
management work in the state of Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan and
Gujarat.
6. I say that the Deponent became employee of the
Defendant No.2 and for the work purposes the deponent and the
Defendant No.2 also opened a joint account in the ANZ
Grendlays Bank.
7. I say that in the year 1992, on the request of defendant no.2,
deponent approached and procured a loan of Rs. 7 lakhs from
the plaintiff and the defendant no.2 stood as a surety for the said
loan amount. The letter dated 23.09.1992 from defendant No.2 to
the plaintiff clearly shows that the defendant No.2 has accepted
the responsibility for the repayment of alleged loan. The same is
marked and exhibited as EXHIBIT DW1/2.
8. I say that the Deponent used to issue various cheques time
to time from the Joint account as held by Defendant No.2 and the
Deponent as per the need and instructions received from
Defendant No.2.
9. I say that the Cheques issued in the present case may
have one of those cheques which were issued earlier as per the
directions of the Defendant No.2.
10. I say that the Defendant No.2 is notoriously known in the
commercial and financial circles as a cheat and fraud. In this
regard, the Deponent would crave leave of this Hon’ble Court to
refer to the contents of the letter addressed to the Assistant
Commissioner of the Income Tax, Bangalore by the Chartered
Accountants of the Deponent, some portions of which are
reproduced hereinbelow:-
“…However, all the misdeeds of Mr. Ashok Shetty
are finally caching up with him:
(a) Shetty Leaseing Ltd., (in which the Defendant No.2 is
the Managing Director) for 95-96.
i) Has tax arrears of 10.43 lakhs
ii) Canara Bank, Vijaya bank & IFI have proceeded
against the Company for recovery of Rs. 138.34
lakhs
iii) Depositors, including I.C.D.’s have filed recovery
proceedings/winding petitioners etc., for Rs. 21.78
lakhs + Interest.
b) Akita Financial Consultants is now impleaded in a
recovery case of Rs. 19 lakhs from Taj Hotels.”
c) Defendant No.2 is in a score of criminal cases for
non-payment of deposits/interest and of bouncing of
cheques.
d) Paying up taxes on fraud returns filed on behalf of
Defendant No.1 and till now Defendant No.2 has
already paid approximately Rs. 4.5 lacs.
e) In Shetty Leasing Ltd. In which Defendant No.2 is
the Managing Director, 491 deposits amounting to
Rs. 159.14 lacs though matured, are still to be
repaid…”.
The letter dated 9.3.1998 addressed to the Assistant
Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore is marked and exhibited
as EXHIBIT –DW1/3.
11. I say that the alleged loan was never advanced to the
Deponent but only to Defendant No.2 for the latter’s benefit. The
Deponent was only a via media for securing the said private loan
for the Defendant No.2. I further say that vide letter dated
20.8.1997 the Defendant No.2 has accepted the responsibility of
re-payment of alleged loan amount. The true copy of the letter
dated 20.8.1997 is marked and exhibited as EXHIBIT-DW1/4.
12. I further say that the Deponent was not even aware of the
purpose for which the alleged loan was granted to Defendant
No.2.
13. I say that deponent never made any payment to the
Plaintiff. The alleged payment of Rs.2 lakhs on 5.1.1994 is
nothing but a clever and desperate attempt to create the alleged
cause of action and thereby manufacturing evidence so as to
escape the period of limitation.
14. I say that Deponent has never issued any Cheque in favour
of Plaintiff for the alleged principal amount of Rs.7,87,675/-. Even
if any Cheque was issued, it was only in respect of business
Transaction and not for re-payment of any loan.
15. I say that there is no semblance of any contract written or
oral, between the Plaintiff and Deponent at any point of time and
there has never been any kind of an oral or a written demand by
the Plaintiff for the repayment of the alleged loan amount.
16. I say that the present suit has been filed by the Plaintiff-
Company in collusion with Defendant No.2 with the ulterior and
malafide motive, viz., to cover up their illegal acts and misdeeds.
It is submitted that the illegal acts and misdeeds of Defendant
No.2 in collusion with the Plaintiff as submitted hereinabove,
goes on to establish that Defendant No.2 has been indulging
into such illegal activities not only against Deponent but with
others also.
17. I further say that Defendant No.2 and Shri Rajiv Gupta, the
authorised representative of the Plaintiff-Company, apart from
being professionally associated; have known each other
personally for many years.
18. I say that the Deponent has never met or had any
association with Shri Rajiv Gupta, the representative of the
Plaintiff Company.
19. I say that the alleged loan amount was advanced to
Defendant No.2 and Deponent was unduly influenced and
dominated upon to sign the relevant papers.
20. I further say that the Defendant No.2 has very cleverly
manipulated Deponent who is wife of a respectable Army officer,
now retired, to obtain a loan as the credit rating of Defendant
No.2 was unacceptable in that market.
21. I say that the present suit is misconceived and misdirected
and has been filed only with a view to extract under and illegal
monetary advantage from Deponent.
22. I say that the alleged loan amount as claimed by the
Plaintiff was advanced to Defendant No.2 only who was the sole
beneficiary of the alleged loan amount.
23. I say that the alleged loan was never ever advanced to
Deponent and the Defendant No.2 has cleverly manipulated and
misused the high social contacts of the Deponent for his illegal
personal gains.
In view of the above averments, The present suit is liable to
be dismissed with heavy costs.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi on this the day of August, 2006, that the
contents of my above Affidavit are true to my knowledge and believe.
Nothing false has been stated therein or material concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF SHRI A.K. SARPAL, ADJ, TIS HAZARI,
DELHI
ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SUIT NO. 592 OF 1996
IN THE MATTER OF:
M/s. Bahubali Services Ltd. … Plaintiff
VERSUS
Smt. Virendra Kumari & Anr. … Defendants
INDEX
S. PARTICUALRS PAGE
NO. NOS.
1. AFFIDAVIT BY WAY OF EVIDENCE
ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT
NO.1. 1–6
FILED BY :
Kumar Dushyant Singh
INDIAN LAW ASSOCIATES
ADVOCATES
16, TODARMAL ROAD,
NEAR BENGALI MARKET
NEW DELHI - 110001
New Delhi
August , 2006
